who sent these people to washington, d.c. in the first place. new jerseyians and new yorkers are tired of being treated like second-class citizens. >> speaker boehner has responded to the fur by back-tracking quickly and thoroughly pledging to vote on the remaining aid passed by the senate on january 15th. if anything with swift we versal, the country has seen the internal divisions in the republican congress but he think unprepared they are. new member of congress, congress are team jehakim jeffries. what happened? >> the weirdest thing about it, i have to say was and we'll get into this because i was prepping for this show and looking at the bill and actually if you start to dig into the bill there's a whole lot of things to object to in it. and you could have made an argument about things in it to object to but no one ever made

the argument against it they just killed it. it was really bizarre. >> the events of last week leave one to ponder the question is there such a thank as a four-ring circus and i've asked that a lot during my time in albany in the most recent past. what's interesting is the with the election of the speaker hopefully we can see, you know, t shenanigans of the last week put in the fast and we can do the people's business. what's interesting is it really does appear that the speaker concluded after the fiscal cliff vote on january 1st, that it was untenable for him to bring the $60 billion flood relief bill to the floor, given the mood of a significant numb over of members of kopg. >> he alienated members of congress because they felt like he caved. the white house had won and the next thing he's going to do that week and the last thing they'll do before they close the lights is $60 billion new in spend

something. >> absolutely. there's concern among many members on the republican side with the debt and deficit and after adding at least the view of many of them, an additional $4 trillion based on the package that was passed to bring another $60 billion in this context was troublesome. but the problem is that disaster relief is traditionally immune from the poisonous parts of politics but for the first time in modern american history it was injected. >> fran, i want to get your perspective on this. you're still not in your house, right? >> i am not. >> your house flooded during hurricane sandy? >> yes, it did. >> how do you respond watching this go down? >> it's very disheartening. everyone in government constantly reaches out to us saying were we're there for you and we'll do everything we can to help you and here we are at day 68 and we have not received

anything from our insurance companies. we've had all our adjusters come out. but now we're watching our government officials say -- it doesn't matter if there's not enough money to pay your claims. it's not important enough. so we're going to push this off. we're at day 68, and everyone is displaced. people cannot get back into their homes. >> well, i think that one is that it was pure politics. no doubt about it. it was another package that was bog to pass with a -- it was going to pass with the minority of the majority and that was an issue. part of the problem is, it shouldn't have taken this long. we should have been debating this a lot earlier. the president didn't submit his package to the congress until december 7th so it was well after the storm and we were well along in that area and certainly, and then the senate took its time and actually, added in a lot of extraneous provisions and the extraneous provisions are one of the things that delay it. when people with pillar the bill with $150 million for fishery

disasters alaska and mississippi because it has extra money added in for other disasters that are not sandy-related it slows the progress of the bill and absolutely, the $9.7 billion, which was to basically, to fund the -- allow the national fund insurance program to borrow from the treasury, additional amount had to be done. we had to keep, just like the debt ceiling, we have to keep the full faith and credit of the u.s. government and we have to make sure we pay our bills and people bought flood insurance policies and paid their premiums, we need to pay those off. >> diane, i want to talk about flood insurance in a second so hold what thought. >> we'll go back to what happened with speaker boehner. i think what we saw on display that day was the worst kind of politics and the kind of thing that really turns people off to government in general and particularly to the congress right now. john boehner was not so much concerned about the vote on the sandy relief package but he was concerned about the vote on his leadership and he was more interested in being leader than they was in leading on an issue affecting thousands of people

that i represent and congressman jeffries does and fran. in this whole discussion it's not whether the bill has pork and what pork actually means, one man's pork is another man's necessity. what was really distressing is there seems to be this narrative now that says -- in order for us to provide relief to someone like fran someone else has to suffer first. that's a very dangerous precedent. >> you know, let me play this bit of sound. this is in the wake of hurricane irene, right, and this is in 2011 when every time this happens we have some sort of emergency supplemental as we should. things get destroyed the government is one of the core roles of government. you said that we had president seen this partizanship before but here is eric kantor in 2011 stipulating as a general principle, emergency supplemental has to come out of someone's pocket. we can't spend above the baseline. here he is. take a look. >> you believe that any federal much that comes out for hurricane irene needs to be met dollar-for-dollar with spending cuts? is that right?

>> yeah. the house has already acted and funded over $1 billion for additional disaster relief pun and that money has been offset by savings elsewhere. like any family, would operate when its struck with disaster. it finds the money it needs to take care of a sick loved one or what have you and goes without trying to buy a new car or put an adig on to the house. >> i'll point out, hurricane irene hit his constituents. he was talking about -- >> that was a remarkable thing. to say what you will about that as a principle he was putting his money where his mouth was. >> exactly. i'll point out, i never said "pork." let me be clear, there are things in here that that are nice to have and that are important. >> like tofu or something healthful? >> there you go. >> but not that we necessarily have to have right now and it should be done as an emergency

because the key then is when you designate something as an emergency, it means it doesn't count against the budget caps. but it does add to our $1 trillion deficit. it does add to our -- >> it also means it's hard to vote for without getting killed on programs like these and finally -- i think that -- >> a couple of differences here. first of all, in this particular instance you had a senate that passed a bill and the speaker promised a vote on the bill, welz publicly prior to the close of congress and then he went back on his word as peter king indicated it was a knife stab in the back. the other thing that's interesting here is that the states of new york and new jersey, along with a few other states, california and illinois, new york and new jersey which were hit hard are donor states. these are states that regularly send tens of billions of dollars more to the federal government that we get back and we

consistently step up for america and in this particular instance we asked america to step up for us and the congress to date, has failed. >> i'm not -- i'm not defending what happened on the floor and the way it transpired. i am all for debate and amendments. that's what -- that's the american process and that's a wonderful process. i would like to see some of that funding stripped out and often, you see one chamber or the other jam the other chamber which is what happened here at this time. they should have done the $9.7 billion and we need to debate the rest of the package because there's stuff in here and quite frankly, i worked on the senate bill. i've read the senate bill many times. i read it recently after it was enacted and or passed. in between, sometime on the floor that i missed, they redesignated some of the core of engineers construction funding to -- so it wouldn't just go to sandy reconstruction but it would also deal with hurricane isaac in states that were affected in the mississippi

valley. what are those two states? louisiana and mississippi. who are those people behind that? probably the ranking member of the appropriation's committee, senator cochran and probably senior democrat on the committee, so that, to me is part of the problem in the system and i don't to continue. >> why do you think they would be interested in putting the money there? let's look at it. i said the year of the flood comes every other year now, it seems. as congressman jeffries said new york and new jersey are donor states. if we got back what we gave to washington we wouldn't being have this discussion. we could take care of ourselves, but we don't. but the likelihood of places like mississippi, louisiana, florida and the gulf coast states will get a lot faster than we are and what's going to happen now is you're going to have members of congress from new york and new jersey and connecticut in the northeast states that may say, you know what? we're going to parcel out aid to you more slowly than you gave it to us. >> so this is what i learned this week in preparation for

this. our flood policy is a total disaster? >> yes. >> and you've had this experience first hand. it's really important. it may sound remote to you, but listen to me, we'll have more floods so we need to get it figured out.

flood policy may sound remote and abstract but fran o'connor from new jersey, you're living flood policy, living through it and, tell me what the experience has been. you're in an area that is part of the national flood insurance program. you have to buy that government insurance in order to get a loan on your house in your area because it's part of the flood plain. what's happened to you over the last 32 months? >> well, in march of 2010, our area suffered a very devastating

and catastrophic flood. our basements filled with water. our -- the water spilled over into our living space, now kmoe, up to four feet in most homes. so after that flood, we ripped out our walls, our flooring and we had to dispose of all of our possessions and there was previously an ongoing army corp study and we requested the status of the army corp project and we were told that the army corp project going on for 20 years, was still probably decades away from completion. >> 20--year-old project, decades away from completion? the army corps of engineers is we could do a whole show on that but, continue. >> so we attempted to find alternative methods to protect our home and our goal was to save our neighborhood and save our home. and so, we researched the feasibility of buyouts, flood

protection, such as an interim wall and any kind of flood mitigation projects that we can research. and at the end of the day we determined through the help of our engineer that the most economical way to save our home was to build an interim sheet pile wall to follow the alignment of the army corp projects that in the design stage. and that was, you know, at the time the most economical avenue that we attempted to take. and so we were researching it and we were working on it and unfortunately, after -- it took us about six months to put our houses back together and after just about a year, after that, we were slammed by hurricane sandy. and our homes were hit with a flood to the same catastrophic area that we had just gotten hit prior. and so, our brand new applieses

and our furnaces and our air conditioners. >> everything that had been rebuilt and replaced. >> and, you know, the unfortunate part about it is your insurance never covers everything that you need to replace your home and so, we're a group of homeowners that had to go out and talk loans out. we had to take sba loans and seco mortgages and -- >> people will say, maybe we shouldn't be living in this. it's easy for me to say. it's not my home and has all the connection someone has to their home but if this is a place that's going to flood three times in 32 months and as the climate changes there's going to be more floods, is there a feasible future? >> well, at this point i think we all resigned to the fact that after we got hit for the third time and we just can't keep doing this. you -- our homes are no longer safe to live in and so now we understand the only alternative

that would be available to us would be for our homes to be bought out. >> and that's absolutely -- i mean, that's something that's being pioneered after the '93 floods is doing this buyouts and you had the town of arnold, missouri and in illinois which are not property values are not the same but they bought out the towns and floodwaters returns to the same area two years later and they were not flooded. >> so the national flood insurance works like this, after hurricane betsy, the private market wasn't offering flood insurance because it's very hard to assess the risk so the government came in and created the flood insurance program and you pay the premium and it's purchased through the private insurer but backstop by the government but after katrina, it blew a $17 billion hole in the budget of the thing and now we'll have sandy blow another huge hole in it and it doesn't seem to me like the program is effectively -- it seems to me the program is having perverse

incentives as far as teams incentivizing buildings in areas that it shouldn't. >> and the program, to put it in perspective, after the claims are paid, this $9.7 additional, there's about $30 billion in the hole to the treasury before sandy, the program took in $3.5 billion a year in premium revenues. so it is severely, no pun intended, under water. >> and on the state side, in senate, we created a bipartisan task force to study the effect of hurricane sandy. sandy didn't seem to discriminate across senate districts so the entire coastal community from the east end of long island to the south shore of staten island has been hit including lower manhattan. we don't talk about that but lower manhattan was offline for quite a while. not to negligent the effect on our transportation system, the better tunnel flooded for almost two weeks. what we're trying to do is look at what role state and local governments will play in future hazard mitigation. including things like, you know, rezoning areas so people won't

be able to rebuild there. how do we add yetly compensate people for the value of their properties prestorm, not post storm. one of the immediate effects of sap did is she has driven down property values across coastal communities by at least 25% and that could affect the real estate markets in those areas for another 20 years. >> to that point, there are two questions that have to be asked. one, are there areas where it's not feasible, based on the probability of extreme weather events continuing to occur that we shouldn't we build. plan has indicated that herself, her family and perhaps some neighbors have concluded that in her instance it's not feezable. and the other question and this was part of the package that has been submitted by governor cuomo and christie and others, are there areas where with restructuring that's done, to greater protect, against the possibility of extreme weather events, people can build, but the government and partnership with the private sector can

created a infrastructure where we can better protect folks from future events? >> one of the trends we've seen -- there are two trends. a greater share of disaster funding has been coming from federal government as close to state level got we have. i think we have some data on that prekatrina and post katrina. katrina is the innext point and understandably. this is a risk-pooling enterprise and if one area of the country, you see the share between insurance and federal aid has really flipped. also, the number of weather events per year that have coast over $1 billion in damages from 1980 to 2012 has spiked. i mean, now, the question there is -- there's two things going on there. more concentration of value in areas that are flood-prone and there are worse weather events. and the question i want to ask and the question we need to get to is, reckconceptizing, the faf disaster. no one is talking about that. we're going to keep passing

supplementals and putting bandaids on stuff and put programs that were put in place in 1968 when there was a completely different climb and so it's going to be penny wise and pound foolish. we'll talk about that after this break.

i've always had to keep my eye on her... but, i didn't always watch out for myself. with so much noise about health care... i tuned it all out. with unitedhealthcare, i get information that matters... my individual health profile. not random statistics. they even reward me for addressing my health risks. so i'm doing fine... but she's still going to give me a heart attack.

we're more than 78,000 people looking out for more than 70 million americans. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare. >> steve ellis. >> you were talking about the flood shuns program and the problems with the flood insurance program and one of the thigs that's interesting when you look at the senate bill is that for sandy relief is that it requires that the corps review its existing projects that were built to provide flood protection and storm damage redux and in six months come back and tell them how they performed but this three months they're start to building new projects so we're essentially, most likely going to put back into place spending billions of dollars, virtually the same structure. we're going to rebuild in a very similar manner with beach replenishment projects and berms and dunes that will keep in harm's way and that's been the problem with our flood plain

policy and even with the flood insurance program, one of the things is that the only team you have a mandatory purchase requirement is if you're in the 100-year flood plain. >> explain that steps. >> exactly. it doesn't mean it floods once every 100 years. i had means there's a 1% chance every year that you will flood. that means in a 30-year mortgage you'll flood at least once. so what we found is that that is dumbed-down our nation's flood control policy because in a lot of places in the country and i'm not necessarily saying in your town but in a lot of places in the country it's get 100-year protection and you're perfectly fine and you don't have to buy flood insurance but there's a 200-year event which has a half percent chance of happening refry year. >>nd the point is those are moving figures so what a storm 100 years from now is different than what it is. >> somebody is upstream from you you're now much more likely to

flood because that water is republicaning off through the subdivision much faster. it's a dynamic environment and we're not arming people with the information and we're not arming people with the facts that they need to be purchasing flood insurance. >> and the other problem we have particularly with respect to insurance is not just flood insurance. we've had homeowners all across the region fighting with their insurance companies right now and we're finding people with insurance and who think they have the coverage to protect their home, forget about the flood insurance, in jn, wind damage or hurricane damage or content are finding that they either don't have -- their insurance company the not responding to them. that's a conic problem. most people are underinsured. it's an industry on people betting against themselves. you hope you never need it and the insurance companieses are not in the business of paying out claims and their goal is to keep the money you gave them. they don't want to pay it out and we're finding that people think they have a particular level of coverage but when you delve into their insurance policy, they may not necessarily have it. we see with flood insurance people have flood insurance for

structure but not for content. >> right. >> but then what the insurance companies. >> or wind damage but as soon as the wind is over 74 miles an hour you don't have hurricane coverage. >> the insurance companies think structure of a house is not what the local building department says. so they say structure is your foundation and your roof. what makes the house habitable. but it doesn't include sheetrock, insulation, floors. we would not allow you to live in a house with those things. but the insurance companies said, that's not structure. >> the broader pron here is that insurance is a way of dealing with the risk of catastrophe and it has been since the dawn of civilization, basically. >> and inform people of the risk. >> but the point is that the risks are changing. this is a thing that i think the policy apparatus and the united states congress of which you're now a member is completely in the dark about, which is that we're entering the era climate disaster. it's here and it's going to get

worse. if you look at the report written by some of the insurance company, they see the writing on the wall and they're putting it into their balance sheets but it's not happening in the united states congress. >> we clearly have to re-evaluate the manner in which the national flood insurance program is put into place and implemented. and have that policy discussion moving forward. we obviously, hopefully, on the 15th, have to take care of the remaining $51 billion in aid perhaps maybe the extraneous items like the alaskan fisheries. which i'm sure are important. >> but we have to move forward to provide the aid to fran and other communities and all that, but the existence of the national flood insurance program is a necessity for the very reasons we discussed. the private market will not step into this situation. it didn't in 1968, moving forward which is why we created a program and it certainly will not now given the extreme nature

and increased risk with severe weather events. >> no. clearly there was a market failure or lack of it in 1968 when they created the program and then they tried to write a program that actually was done in a risk-based rates and nobody bought it. in the early '70s we jacked up subsidies to the program and that's what start -- some of our problem in the fact that we had underpriced insurance which created some of the problem in our balance sheet. and it's also induced people to build in harm's way because it hadn't informed them of the risk or charged them. >> i want to be clear. you guys are saying opposite things. you're saying insurance is underpriced and you're saying it's overpriced? we're clear that you two are disagrees if the price is right? >> i paid $3,000 a year in flood insurance. i don't think it's underpriced. >> part of the problem is because of the way the system is and because we have a flood insurance program it's what they call adverse selection. the only people that buy flood insurance are the people most

likely to need it because that's all we require. >> exactly. >> so we don't have whereas when you have, you know, you have insurance for homeowners they're selling policies all over the country and so we don't have that in the flood insurance program so it's kind of intensed this problem that's there. >> and again, this is the problem. flood plains areas will expand and areas exposed to extreme weather will expand. weather-related damage and catastrophe will become more common. everything that's conceptized around what the roll of the dice is has to change because the snake eyes will come up more and more and more and right now federal policy is absolutely totally and completely blind to that basic fact. and the irony of it all as we talk about dollars and cents is it will cost more money unless we get it right and unless we put in poll as yous that mitigate floods and encourage people not to build in flood plains. we're going to produce not only more disaster and human suffering and misery and more being out of your home and having to deal with the

consequences of that. but we're also going to deal with a situation where we're spending billions and billions and billions of dollars in more money thank you all for being here. i really enjoyed the conversation. >> thank you. >> the 112th congress untold shore of bipartisanship. that's next.

officemax can help you drive supply costs... down... ...and down. just use your maxperks card and get a case of x-9 paper for only 1-cent after maxperks rewards.

find thousands of big deals now... ...at officemax. i'm here to unleash my inner cowboy... instead i got heartburn. [ horse neighs ] hold up partner. prilosec isn't for fast relief. try alka-seltzer. kills heartburn fast. yeehaw! the standard story you'll hear about the 112th congress ask they were a do-nothing congress. they let traditionally noncontinues very shall partizan bills like the violence against women's act expire. but that's only half the story of the last congress because over the past two years the 112th congress has managed to get a lot of stuff done. for instance, in mid 2011 they

were renewed the patriot act for another four years and passed the 2012 national defense authorization act, a $662 billion bill that codified indefinite military detention for the first time and barred the transfer of prisoners from guantanamo bay to the united states. and last month they passed the defense authorization act that included the same indefinite detention at guantanamo bay provisions as the 2012 version and a new round of iran sanctions mention other things. and last week they revised the wire-tapping act which allows the government to spy on american's e-mail and common communications for another five years. all of these bills past both the senate and house with very broad bipartisan majorities. as senate intelligence committee chair diane finestein pointed out last week, the come is a place where she's been able to work in a true by bipartisan manner. >> one of the best experiences of my senate career has been the

ability to work in a bipartisan way in this committee. to really put things together between both sides. to have staffs working together on both sides. sometimes, that isn't possible. but most of the time, it is and i think it's the way the intelligence committee was supposed to function and the fact that i does function that way. i think is real testimony to vice chairman chambliss and the work we've done together. >> vicious partizanship of the 112th congress on anything domestic often overshadowed the broad consensus seen on matters of national security and that complicated not only the story of the 112th congress but our conception of bipartisanship and its value as a whole. joining us now is the codirector of the liberty and national program and president and ceo of the naacp and the host of wviifm

steve ellis is still here. liza, if you had to sort of sum up from the perspective of the policies that you're keeping an eye on, sum up what this congress, was it a do-nothing congress? a congress driven by partizan provision or a productive bipartisan enterprise? [ laughter ] >> you summarized it very well, i'm afraid. the story of national security legislation in this congress was really not a story of, you know, trying to get valuable legislation through and getting blocked by this de facto 60-vote threshold. forget about the threshold, congress charged that in the senate, the senate charged past that threshold on a number of national security provisions what that had some very disturbing implications for liberties. >> for instance? >> you did name some of them and i'll go into a little more detail. the national defense authorization act. the most recent one. that is an act that's also

passed the year before in 2011 that codifies indefinite detention for a group of people that's very, very broad in the current war against al qaeda and taliban and associated forces so that not only -- >> associated doing a lot of work there? >> it is. and the other thing that's doing a lot of work is substantially supported. anybody who substantially supported these forces is subject to indefinite detention which is not something that you would get if you went back and read the authorization for use and military force from 2001, which describes a narrower set of people, frankly. >> so we've actually expanded? >> legislatively, yes. in some ways, this bill was basically codifying what the lower courts have been doing. >> have allowed. >> have alouds. >> the supreme court hadn't weighed in on whether this is okay. will it? i don't know. >> let me ask you this, ben, the naacp is not an institution

that's focused on national security issues, for understandable reasons but i wonder sometimes and i'm not someone that welcome i don't myself, that's not the thing i spend most of my time reading about but i wonder if when you think about this stuff, the role of an organization like naacp to weigh in on this stuff partly because of the history of what the civil rights movement faced and -- >> look, we're not a national security group. we're a freedom group and this is about freedom at the end of the day. this country, we used to be completely opposed to the government spying on your mail, but now it's online and we're apparently cool with, you can read all my e-mail and listen to all ni cell phone conversations. that's a big problem. >> although that's one thing congress did right but i'll get back to that. >> you know, the -- as far as we

know, right? >> right. >> i live a few miles from the national security agency, who knows with them? but with the usa patriot act, its definition of terrorism says, if you break a law while p putting lives in danger, seeking to influence policy in the united states, you've violated the patriot act. that's like everything martin luther king did in public. >> breaking laws? law plauzbly, who knows. >> birmingham, the children's march, the march on washington, the march -- every anti-abortion protest? any time you're in the street you put people in danger and you're often breaking a law. so you know, again, we should all be up in arms about this stuff, and yet, you know. >> and frankly you don't have to have broken a law or be suspected of breaking a law to come within what the patriot act

allows the government to do in terms of getting information about you. >> i want to ask you guys what this means for our conception of bipartisan ship. that's part of what the core is. always the story, we are had bipartisanship and we lost it and that's bad and that doesn't seem to me at all a complete picture of what this congress was. we'll talk about that after we take this break. [ male announcer ] edmunds.com says the all-new nissan altima is a better car than camry. to argue would be rude. nissan altima. with moving-object detection. lease now. just $199 per month. visit choosenissan.com. road and track called sentra an economy car minus the look and feel of an economy car. wonder how civic and corolla look and feel about that. the all-new nissan sentra, with best-in-class mpg. lease for $169 per month. visit choosenissan.com.

describe the room. a big, open space. smells really fresh, man. oh! [ both laugh ] febreze? how about that? yeah. febreze anti-clogging technology keeps it smelling fresh. febreze. breathe happy. bipartisanship, yay or nay? >> how disturbing is it that the success of the 112th congress is to pass legislation that essentially criminalizes elements of democracy? like the place where democrat and republican comes together, is in the erosion of civil liberties such that you will little rally turn back elements of american history and that that is how we define success. >> and the thing to me that was so crystallizing about it and the reason i wanted to have this specific conversation was that we had this week where we're watching the fiscal cliff

"countdown" and the contentionness and the sandy vote and it was like, by the way, the fisa extension sailed through. and that was the thing. so people remember how controversial this was back in 2008. this is harry reid in 2008 talking about this bill. and then him talking about it four years later. take a look. >> fisa, the president's favorite. his ability to spy. that's what he wants. the problem is, that he wants to do it not in keeping with the constitution which raises some concern with us. and the american people. >> fisa, mr. president, this is an important piece of legislation imperfect as it is, is what is necessary to help us be protected from the evil that's in the world. >> for people at home watching this, exact same bill. >> literally. nothing was changed between the

reauthorization. >> except for who happened to be in the white house which is part of the reason why senator reid, a drakt, not saying it was right. >> but freedom should be the bipartisan thing. >> i'm not disagreeing. i'm just pointing out the pure politics and the pure theater of this. so that's what a lot of this congress was. a lot of theater and a lot of bombast and was the least prukive since world war ii. >> and it did specify their agenda as far as blocking president obama from doing anything and it's arguably been successful. >> but it doesn't work in both directions. and this is kwooe. harry reid in the opposition opposed the warrantless wire tapping and his president from his party gets in and all of the sudden he wants to give hymn due

deference but the republicans remain in lockstep and the reps say they want to block everything the president does. sandy can be, don't want to block this. >> so it begs the question where is the tea party. the boston tea party would have violated the u.s. patriot act. >> but some members did in the senate, they did -- >> and rand paul particularly. >> right. so i think there was some of that tension but it just wasn't enough and there were a lot more people -- there is this sort of, whether it's true or not, this sort of security vein that runs through the republican party that's supportive of that so you peel off a small portion, not a whole party to move -- >> but -- i'm not defending it. >> this is the part that hurts. >> hold that thought, we'll take a quick break. bayer aspirin was the first thing the emts gave me. now, i'm on a bayer aspirin regimen. [ male announcer ] be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. [ woman ] learn from my story.

because for every 2 pounds you lose through diet and exercise, alli can help you lose one more by blocking some of the fat you eat. let's fight fat with alli. ♪ [ female announcer ] he could be the one. soulmate. husband. loving father to your children. but first you've got to get him to say, "hello." new crest 3d white arctic fresh toothpaste. use it with these 3d white products, and whiten your teeth in just 2 days. what will a 3d white smile do for you? new crest 3d white toothpaste. life opens up when you do.

>> so what we'lly hurts is we were willing to give up what we wouldn't let the russians take from us in the cold war to

subject ourselves to things that we used to call fascist. and this is why we need a real kind of frank, bipartisan conversation amongst the public in the country but what type of country do we want to live? >> part of the issue here is that there isn't a public opinion appetite on these issues is really low. both an interest and also, look at public opinion. this is bipartisan support for the president's war on terror policy. support for keeping gitmo opened is 62% among democrats. closing gitmo was the throw-away red meat line you would do at any democratic event. >> you have two issue there is. when it comes to national security security, the underlying policy specifically around fear, informs so clearly how little rigorous discussion there is on the one hand. and on the other hand, when it comes to security in the american identity, that becomes

this kind of broad support for throwing all forms of terror and torture, whoever you think is the bad guy that did you wrong so pliltally, the democrats capitulate to that particular philosophy. >> i said, that's understandable. we underwent an absolutely horrific attack in 9/11 and it makes sense. historically when there are these crisis or emergencies, there are broad crisis response powers. >> absolutely. >> that are granted and what happens after a period of time is there's retrenchment. >> absolutely. >> what we're not seeing here. and that's the question. >> this gets the fear thing. this is why the 112th congress is interesting this way. we get further and further away from the event that was so horrifying, and traumatic and fear-inducing for absolutely rational reasons. the further we get and we're arguably, more safe and the further we get from that is more entrenched it seems to be. listen to diane finestein basically marshalling this kind of language against her fellow

senate democrats who are threatening amendments to vote against the bill in defending the program. >> i guess if you believe that there is no one that's going to attack us, then maybe it's fine to do this. i know that there are people trying to attack this country all the time. this is an effort to make that material public. and i think it's a mistake at this particular time. because i think it will chill the program. i know where this goes and where it goes is to destroy the program. i don't want to see it destroyed. >> that's what i have an issue with is these -- they always invoke fear, terror, threat. and then that silence is -- >> there's not an argument about that. she says people want to attack unless you think people don't want to attack us. >> but it's the same person advocating gun safety legislation. but it's just intriguing. and then you have bipartisan support around the absence of rigorous discussion and the

absence of exploring how many years after 9/11, how valid is the patriot act and how valid is passing the ndaa. and the silence from the public is because weir got the idea that this is about quote/unquote keeping us safe. >> but one thing that ties into this is part of what happened legislatively in this case is the house was jamming the senate. the argument is we can't amend fisa because it has to go back to the house and then we won't get it done in time and it won't move which is what we hear about sandy relief. you had to take it up as it is. there's some of this legislative -- >> liza hold you point for a second. one more break. we'll be back and keep talking about this. [ male announcer ] playing in the nfl is tough. ♪ doing it with a cold, just not going to happen. vicks dayquil -- powerful non-drowsy 6-symptom cold & flu relief. ♪ no matter what city you're playing tomorrow.

[ coughs ] [ male announcer ] you can't let a cold keep you up tonight. ♪ vicks nyquil -- powerful nighttime 6-symptom cold & flu relief. ♪ i'm here to unleash my inner cowboy... instead i got heartburn. [ horse neighs ] hold up partner. prilosec isn't for fast relief. try alka-seltzer. kills heartburn fast. yeehaw! kills heartburn fast.

is bigger than we think ... sometimelike the flu.fer from with aches, fever and chills- the flu's a really big deal. so why treat it like it's a little cold? there's something that works differently than over-the-counter remedies. prescription tamiflu attacks the flu virus at its source. so don't wait. call your doctor right away. tamiflu is prescription medicine for treating the flu in adults and children one year and older whose flu symptoms started within the last two days. before taking tamiflu tell your doctor if you're pregnant, nursing. have serious health conditions, or take other medicines. if you develop an allergic reaction, a severe rash, or signs of unusual behavior, stop taking tamiflu and call your doctor immediately. children and adolescents in particular may be at an increased risk of seizures, confusion or abnormal behavior. the most common side effects are mild to moderate nausea and vomiting. the flu comes on fast, so ask your doctor about tamiflu. prescription for flu.

if we took the already great sentra apart and completely reimagined it? ...with best-in-class combined mpg... and more interior room than corolla and civic? ...and a technology suite with bluetooth, navigation and other handy stuff? yeah, that would be cool. introducing the all-new nissan sentra. it's our most innovative sentra ever. nissan. innovation that excites. now get a $169-per-month lease on a 2013 nissan sentra. ♪ maybe you want to incorporate a business. or protect your family with a will or living trust. and you'd like the help of an attorney. at legalzoom a legal plan attorney is available in most states with every personalized document to answer questions. get started at legalzoom.com today. and now you're protected.

i have liz here from the center for justice and steve ellis of taxpayers of common sense and we're talking about bipartisanship and partisanship in the 112th congress. and particularly, the layer of the story about the level of partisanship in this congress that didn't get enough attention which is we focused on all the places where it was extremely partisan and all the data shows increasing polaration and the debt ceiling fight and domestic policy and the violence against women act totally bipartisan pieces of legislation left to die over partisan obstruction. once you turn your attention to the national security area and civil liberties and things like that it's been a bipartisan enterprise. a lot of legislation has come out of the congress not passed by 61 or 62 but 85 or 90 reasons. and this is an area, there was something you were going to say

before we got to break and i rudely interrupted you. >> i have to respond to the point that fear is sort of used as a way to push these things through and i think that, yes, i think sometimes fear is used as a way to get what people in the executive or people in congress want to do anyway. but i actually, i take them at their word. i think dianne feinstein is very worried about another terrorist attack. genuinely believe that. it often comes from a place of again win concern about security. what's missing from this picture -- what i was going to say is what's missing from this picture is any sense of the history in terms of how these powers are actually used. and they're not actually used to keep us safe, at least not that we can tell. but historically, if you look at what the church committee found in the 1970s, these broefr broad surveillance powers, very, very quickly get turned against

unpopular political and social and racial minorities. >> and there have been coming out of denver and such. >> absolutely. >> so my point is they just -- senator feinstein you're saying there's a again win concern. i think it's deploying this universally-accepted policy around fear and threat to pass what would otherwise be absolutely problematic for the majority of people. >> and -- i think there's a -- >> i think they can both be true. >> i'm saying where is the evidence for her concern? >> but she's not using it. >> isn't the again winness is part of the problem. right? if you go back and read the 1% doctrine and the book on dick cheney, he wasn't faking it. he seriously was a super paranoid dude. and you know what? he went through 9/11 and that messes people up in some ways and he thought, i mean, the point is -- >> the point is you're saying

that they don't use it for the concern that they've expressed. >> it's extremely broad, extremely broad. and the problem is we're supposed to be the land of the free and the home of the brave. with all due respect we're not like every other country on earth. we have this notion of ourselves as defenders of freedom and people are willing to take a risk for freedom who have done that again and again and when you inject fear into that and you don't have a public conversation about it, we change and we change in ways that are profound and, yet, profoundly undiscussed. >> i think what's happening here is -- i think what's happening here more than fear is the b bureaucratization of fear. >> but it's the way policy works. >> but it doesn't work. that's the point. >> i'm saying in -- >> it continues and the policy is at stake. one small national security benefit was the whistle blower protection extended to a

contractors so that's a tiny -- it's significant -- >> to the intelligence community they were stripped from their house bill so people who work in national security still don't have any protections for blowing the whistle. that wasn't a coincidence. >> but what we're saying is there's something unique and distinct about the way partisan politics operates under the conditions of war on terror model and fear-based model and the tough you guys spend a lot of time at and i have a tremendous amount of respect for the work you do and your organization does because i think you play it fair and straight accrues the board idealogically. what i'm hearing from you is it's not that different from the way congress operates in a lot of other areas. >> absolutely. there's a lot of log rolling and it is iner tia. and the other dynamic is that the republicans have always tried to portray themselves as the party of national security,

the democrats have always felt vulnerable on that so it's sort of ends up being the sort of perfect storm that lusz legislation forward. it's not surprising in the house, sandy supplemental bill that they have put together, not a dime was taken out of any of the veteran's funding, for instance, in that thing. everything else got at least a little bit of the nick but cemetery funding or facilities construction for veterans all was held and that was the only part of that that was. >> and the missing link there was president obama. as you said the democrats feel a little vulnerable here. if you go back and look at the voting record back in the 110th congress, when the fisa amendment was passed it was passed with a bipartisan majority with 69 votes in the senate. so the democrats were voting for it back then too and there was a window here and the window was, they were waiting for leadership and waiting for president obama to back them up. without him getting this there and fighting and he had that opportunity but even though national security legislation is usually a one-way ratchet, the

last administration overreached so far that he could have said, this is different. we have to go back. but the democrats aren't sticking their necks out on the if the president is a the this. >> and part of the fiscal cliff is, let's not do it to steps. >> the domestic side, let's cut it and let's not cut the defense despite the fact that if we had across the board cuts it would have taken the defense budget back to the level it was at 2006. >> people don't get just how much defense has grown in the last 10 or 12 years. and one of the questions that i have and could we throw the polling up, the support for keeping gitmo open and endorse the use of drones. 79% of democrats and 91% of republicans. >> 79% of democrats. and my question is here is. and i'm curious to hear your thoughts on this, the cause and effect. which is to say -- do people informing their public opinion

talk their queues from their partisan representatives? and i think tea party realization is a efficient way to go about navigating a democracy. they say this is fine and i trust them because i trust them on things like the sandy supplemental and defending medicare so my opinion gets formed by the queues i'm taking off my partisan leadership or is it the other way around? the fact that there's a bipartisan consensus in congress around national security issues because there's solid public opinion, bipartisan consensus and the representatives reflect that? >> i think you're assuming a better conduit between the people and their representatives in either direction, than actually exists. >> that's the assumption of democracy. >> but let's be honest, this is a multi-billion dollar industry. there's a drone kwau kacaucus i- so they -- and so it's not

surprising that we see congress supporting drones. one of the untold bipartisan stories of this congress was legislation to open the domestic skas to surveillance drones. >> another bipartisan victory of the 112th. >> exactly. so then there's the spin and then there's the media and the fact that most of the information about the drone program, certainly the targeted killing program, is not available. and so it becomes very easy for public opinion. >> do you think this is an interest group issue, basically? >> it's a lot of things but i think you have to follow the money. >> a big part of this is silence. a big part of this is simply silent. >> it's not being discussed much. you have instinct and insight. insight can actually trump instinct. queue got to have debate and discussion. and the silence, you have instinct and fear is a powerful instinct and that's what as play. >> look, i think a lot of it is i trust barack obama and i voted for him and i think he has passion and empathy and good

judgment and they thinks this is okay. >> if you go back to the beginning of 2008, just after the president was elected one of the first things he said is, i want to close gone tan month, we're not that nation. when you see the passage of legislation that goes against what you authored. >> they jammed him up on the authorization spending and he didn't say a word. >> he was silent. >> but this suggests and i think to bring us around to this causal story we're telling you here about this -- the fact that they'll really did a bunch of stuff in the beginning that was in keeping with their promises. he signed an executive order on the first day and they released memos and there was movement in all directions and then they got hammered in congress and got hammered on the sunday shows and all over the place and then they retreated. that's part of the story particularly in the early stages

and that says something about interest groups or public opinion. it says something about being responsive to where the median voter is on the issue and being wordried that the median voter in the median congressional swing district is thinking you're going to bring a terrorist to his house, basically, and put him in your basement. >> one of the things president obama says that part of leadership is been willing to do what you think needs to be done even despite what the public wants you to do. being willing to at least fight the nice and go to the public and articulate why it's important to continue the fight. i think with president obama, two issues. it's not just about compromise. it's the consistent perception that he capitulates. not even the rigorous discussiontion to explore all the issues on the table and the silence has become his philosophy. >> but be clear on fisa. he was leading. >> you always want to listen to a wiretap.

>> of course. >> thank you all for being here. >> what we can learn from the country's newest murder capital. that's next. blooper

. counting up the year's murder is a annual grim thesity for cities. in 2012, chicago was the top of the list, 506 murders the most and 2011 homicide total of 433 and finished six-murders shy of the 512 murders it recorded in 2008. for years chicago murder's rate has increased and decreased under various mayors but last year was particularly embarrassing for chicago mayor rom emanuel. and in new york, on the on the

other hand, a city with three times as many people in chicago, homicide h are down about 18% in the last year under mayor michael bloomberg and new york finished the year with 418 murders the lowest number in any year since reliable records were kept beginning in 1963. now, washington, d.c., a place once so plagued with killings. people used to say d.c. stood for "dodge city" recorded just 88 homicide last year according to the metro police department so would what we've seen over the last 20 years is a remarkable in the crime nationwide including many big cities but persistly high levels of violence in impoverished communities and some extremely-worrying localized upticks in last year. the divergence between chicago and new york gets us to examine crime and what causes it to go down. i have keith suber, he mentors troubled yoult and gang members in brooklyn. he's a former member of the

crypts gang and served ten years in prison. and the professor and codirector of the university of chicago crime lab. great to have you both here. let's start on the criminalology side with you, harrold. what's going on in chicago somethat's the first thing to ask. it's getting national attention. monica davey had a great piece in "the new york times." great reporter if you're out there, journalism gods, show a little -- she had a really good piece about the homicide problem. and she made this point, more than 80% of the city's homicide took place last year in half of chicago's 23 police directs. so half of the districts are producing the homicide largely on the city's south and west sides and neighborhoods on the northside not far from lake michigan acknowledge they heard about a rise in the city's homicide rate but says it did not affect their sense of safety. incredibly localized problem here. >> by the way, i loved half of

that story. and i hated the headline which was that homicides are soaring. we're actually quite low compared to ten years ago, you know. overall this story is not as bad as people might think. >> but it sells papers. >> well, i thought -- but i thought she captured very well the human dimension and the disparity. many people live at a level of safety that's comparable to a west city. if you live lincoln park or the other side you're quite safe. if you live in the far south side or westside of chicago, young people there you know, face a very high homicide rate and as the rates have come down in so much of the city the disparity is very glaring. i don't know that it's different from cleveland, detroit, many other places, but we clearly have a challenge there that needs to be addressed. >> keith you were nodding your head when i was talking about the new york data and that's someone who was been around

violence in coney island neighborhood and coney island is being repped hard today on the the show. we had hakeem jeffries here and you're from coney island. when you look at the data, how does it line up with your personal experience and what is your understanding of why homicide have come down in the city so much? >> i think basically, what's happened is the spike of jobs. the economy coming back to new york city. i think the fact that people now are starting to understand that murder is something serious. crime is something serious. people out there selling drugs. people getting involved in that lifestyle, people want to change their life nowadays. so basically what we're seeing is a turn around, especially in my community in cope any island. there's a spike of jobs and a promise of jobs. they're building and building. a lot of these senators, they've put funding in place so we can

train these individuals because they don't want coney island to be known as a gang-plagued community as we're building. >> are you saying that people's understanding of how acceptable violence is in dealing with rival gang members, that that's changed over time? >> yes, i think so. it really has. there's no more structure in gangs. when i was involved in gangs there was structure. my brothers were the original members of the seven immortals which the movie "the warriors" was made from and there's always the president, vice president, the war sfloord a hierarchy. >> a hierarchy and now a lot of youth are just doing things to prove themselves to other individuals in the community. >> that's right. >> look, we -- the we've gone after the heads of these gangs and gotten a lot of them in

prison and what happens is that you cut off the head and you get 100 heads. everybody is their own head of the gang and have their own set. we have a real problem of a. >> caller: sure of violence in many of our communities and we have to deal with that head-on and we have to admit that that's been created by a broader contech. a context of failed criminal justice policies and context of a gun-drenched nation and a context of poverty. the reality is that in places like this, there's never a job for you but the gang always has a job for you. >> always. >> and so that's why, you know, when mayor bloomberg last year -- think where we were this time last year. we were saying stopping first has to go down and murders will go up. it went down, right? >> right. >> but jobs went up and that's why murder went down. is that, from a social science perspective, one of the things that i think is fascinating when

you dive into the literature on crime, this is what happened. a massive boom in crime, particularly violent crime in this country, peaking around the early 90s. it's been declined. massively and rapidly and these are the sort of big national statistics and it's declined in different communities across racial barriers and income barriers and urban and rural and we don't understand why it happened. is that basically the where we are? >> i think there's a lot of truth to that and my colleague absolutely would like to say there were all these police chiefs total idiots in the '80s and all the others they were brilliant in the '90s. it's like the stock market. it goes up and everyone has a theory about it. we know way less than we should about what's effective to bring the crime rate down but we do know some things and we have some good ideas. >> i want to know what we know right after we take this break. . i'm consolidating my assets. i'm not paying hidden fees or high commissions.

i'm making the most of my money. and seven-dollar trades are just the start. i'm with scottrade. i'm with scottrade. i'm with scottrade. and i'm loving every minute of it. [ rodger riney ] at scottrade, we give you commission-free etfs, no-fee iras and more. come see why more investors are saying... i'm with scottrade.

is a better car than camry. to argue would be rude. nissan altima. with moving-object detection. lease now. just $199 per month. visit choosenissan.com. road and track called sentra an economy car minus the look and feel of an economy car. wonder how civic and corolla look and feel about that. the all-new nissan sentra, with best-in-class mpg. lease for $169 per month. visit choosenissan.com.

>> harrold pollack, codirector of the crime lab in chicago. what do we know about the crime in the last -- >> there's no one thing that explains it. but i think policing is better and i think there's no question that sort of the new york city innovative cops on the doc process and -- >> explain that what means. what changed about policing. this is the dominant story that gets told and then i'll let you respond to it. >> new york city enlarged its police department and improved the management of it and focused on every week we want to understand, where relevant crimes happening? and if we put a bunch of dots across the city where are the crimes and where the police officers and what are they doing in relating to those dots so that brings the police to the places the crime is happening. if you take a place like chicago or new york the way the politics work you're going to get tremendous law enforcement where upies live and influential people are. that's not where people are getting killed so you have to

have some counterweight to that and that's something that was done more effectively. >> does that resonate with you, keith? that the presence of miss in a neighborhood does succeed in this basic bringing violence down? >> it comes down to the "how." >> exactly. because what happens is a lot of times the youth out on the street, if, say if a murder took please and the presence comes because now, they're looking for people to cooperate. but where was this presence before the murder took place? that's a lot of things where a lot of times in the community where people choose not to trust the police, choose not to deal with them. but what happens -- what i've come to see from being a former gang member is that it's okay. it's okay to live in your community and do the right thing in your community. i'm not saying that you should tell the police -- let me -- i'm not saying you should tell the police every little detail of what goes on in your community.

but if someone gets murdered or if someone is unjustifiably killed, if there's a crime that takes place. >> somebody's raped. >> somebody's raped, those types of crime need to be reported. >> but this is an interesting point because bun of the things and one of the focuses on policing that happened was prevention as opposed to frrgs. the emphasis of preventing crime from happening as opposed to catching people who did crime and one of the issues in chicago now isn't just the high murder rate but the unsolved murders and it's colossal. you go into a community and you know, most cases are made at the local level by basically, someone informing. >> that's a number that every citizen should know about their city and most don't. we focus on the homicide rate. did it go up? did it go down? we don't talk about the solve rate and the fbi releases it every year and we really should have it down to the zip code because what you see when you

look at the zip code level is the impact of segregation on our law enforcement. in any segregated society, the way it has worked, whether it was south africa or here was if crime happens in the ghetto, that's a problem to fixing itself. if you kill somebody outside of your area or outside of south central, then you got a problem because if you kill somebody in, that's okay. and that was with us until very, very recently so part of what happened here with cops and come com stat was a good thing. but you have to go one step further. because the other legacy of segregation is that the cops fear the people in the neighborhood. and when you actually put cops on the beat, when you require them to be part of that neighborhood. when you do what bill bralten has done in los angeles and respect the people in the neighborhood and get to know them, crime false further faster.

>> and the point is that that philosophy is not revolutionay and it makes me think of two things. one is the intimate relationship with vie leps that young people have as a result of the number of unsolved murders and unsofld crimes. >> because they don't think the state will provide justice. >> it's not think, it's a fact. they know the brother or father they lost no one has come to investigate that murder. wonderful article and what erika ford charts that there is a direct link between those young people who have been victims of crimes before they become perpetrators of crime. the specific correlation. >> it gets to this epidemiology of this. >> and by the way, we need to talk about how young people think about violence and how we can help young people deal more effectively with with each other

when they often have scars from being exposed to violence, either being victims or perpetrators in various ways. and i think that -- >> part of that, i mean, part of that is the great work that we're doing in the schools and part of that is making sure that people -- if you having a says to a psychologist. we have neighborhoods in this country where the kids are twice as likely to suffer from ptsd than soldiers coming back from the front but we have to deal with it the same way. >> and then the stigma around those issues. a lot of people in low-income communities. there's tremendous stigma about seeking out and acknowledges that you have issues and coming forward and use the resources are there. >> i want to go back to the i want malt regularship with violence. when i was young my father was a politician. the fact that he was a politician didn't change the thing that soldiers came up to our house with guns this hair hand, tried to kill my mother in

front of us and my sisters and for two years after that we lived under house arrest with armed soldiers so it turns your neighborhood and your home into a domestic battleground. so because i've mentored young girl what have been victims of that crime, it specifically affects your relationship with the notion of safety. and what you ups intimately is that you're on your own. >> i want to ask you, keith, about the way that you think -- for naught about violence and then and think about it now after this break. that make kids. and even fewer that make moms happy too. with wholesome noodles and bite sized chicken, nothing brings you together like chicken noodle soup from campbell's. it's amazing what soup can do.

diarrhea, gas, bloating?

yes! one phillips' colon health probiotic cap each day helps defend against these digestive issues... with three strains of good bacteria. [ phillips' lady ] live the regular life. phillips'. until i show them this. the oral-b pro-health clinical brush. its pro-flex sides adjust to teeth and gums for a better clean. the pro-health clinical brush from oral-b. >> esther, there's this 1993 article in the "post" that got a lot of attention and this was at the peak level of violence. getting ready to die young, children in the violent d.c. neighborhood plan their own funeral. children as young as 10 have said where they want to be buried. what their want their mourners to wear and they want their

funeral floral arrangements to spell out their favorite brands of clothing. this gets to being drenched in a universe where people are dying and subject to violence. keith, what did that do to how you thought about violence, seeing that around you? >> growing up on coney island is i've been surrounded by violence and growing up in the projection, and the projects all over chicago, d.c. -- when you live that environment you become a product that environment. it becomes cliche' to stand in front of the building every day with your home boys, drinking and smoke a blunt. this is the reality of it. this is what our youth think is the way of life right how. a lot of them don't have the initiative to get out and go find their appointment and this is why we're trying to bring this abroad. >> but violence, specifically, what did you think about it as a way of dealing with someone either doing something to someone you loved or -- >> well, i mean, there was a

time when i was a very violent individual at one time. and a lot of times you don't think about what you're doing to someone to hurt them when the thought is in process. it's like if it happens there's a reaction. this is the mentality and now it's even more so with the video games and the kids that sit there all day and play video games and it becomes easy to pull the trigger in the video game and in real life, people think that it's the same thing but it's not because you're dealing with the flesh of of a human life. >> i think it's important. there's a risk here that we put it all on these kids. and we the grownups that run society don't take responsibility. >> if you go back and, say, to prohibition. if question we were sitting here with a reformed member of al capone's gang during prohibition.

how can we stop violence in our neighborhood? someone could say, we have to stop print prohibition. >> here's the most macroversion of this is there's an article out, kendra jones wrote this remarkable arrested kel that looks at the crime to peak and falloff in the context of let. we started putting a lot of -- the post world war ii levels went up because of the lead in gasoline and then the catalytic converters and the lead comes down. and those two curves of the amount of lead in gas and the amount of violent crime per 10,000 people match each other with about a 23-year gap which means, when we start putting lead in the air. we start getting more crime 23 years later and we start taking it out and we get less crime. that's like the human individual level of why is someone reacting to violence or trauma and then the most diffuse molecular

environmental level and my question to you is -- how plausible is this as a theory of what's happened? >> i think that -- three no one thing that explains a huge fraction of what's going on but i think it's very plausible that lead is a serious problem and anything that lowers people's cognitive abilities and challenges people's executive function is a real problem and this has been for decades we've known that we've had serious lead problems. we haven't dealt with it as aggressively as we need to and it's striking. if you look at the numbers kevin mentions in the article, we would need $400 billion to deal with this problem in one shot. i don't know if that's a good or bad policy in and of itself. when the financial system was under stress we came up with that level of money because we all understood, we cannot survive as a so seat if our financial sector is threatened. when i look at the problems we're facing in urban america that we faced for decades i don't see the same sense of urgency that's says -- we really need that level of commitment to deal with it. and it's certainly plausible

that lead is an important issue. >> and here's where the politics gets tricky and it gets to what you were saying, ben, about the kind of ways in which the com stat model and the new policing has created backlash. we should be paying attention to violence in these neighborhoods and we should be addressing it but the ways we tend to address it in our political system can often produce a lot of perverse reactions. we'll talk about that right after this.

>> we're talking about violence and crime and the kind of twin realities that i think of violent crime in america which is that we've seen this remarkable drop-off in lots of cities and across the nation and yet at the same time, the intimate experience of violence this certain very specific localized places is still horrible. and unacceptable by any standard. and talking about ways of continuing to try to push that rate down and reduce violence and different methods.

and one of them is this interrupter's model used in chicago and it gets to what you said, keith. you talked about it in terms of an action and then a reak, right? there's no that loop is something is done and violence is a response. and this is about literally, interrupt the loop. take a look. >> by the time we got out there, the fight had just ended. one group of guys said the young man threatened that he had a gun and that he was going to kill him. so he started fighting and ended up getting his teeth knocked out. when kobe got him off location i asked kobe to take him to the hospital. the story about sticks and stones may break your bones but words can never hurt you? words will get you killed. >> that's right. >> the model there is basically,

when there is an incident, it is going to people and basically, trying to council them away from the reaction, right? >> to diffuse it. >> how effective has this been and does this have promise for a way of thinking about those continuing to push the level of violence down in these communities that have been resistant to some of the other trends? >> i think it's helpful. i don't think we know in a rigorous way how helpful but it's definitely been helpful and it changes the tone that you don't -- i think that we have to create an environment where violence is the last resort rather than the first resort and i've been out on that corner with the interrupters and if you talk to people in those communities they believe that those interrupters are being very helpful and people will they will those interrupters things that they won't tell other people. a lot of times people don't want to retaliate but they need a dignified path not to retaliate and the interrupters can be helpful. i don't think it's a cure-all

but i think it's an essential element in prevention focus. and the idea of we think of the world as having white hats and black hats and that's not the way the world unfolds. >> what do you mean? good guys and bad guys? >> when a young person commits an act of violence he's a bad person. he did it because of some deeply-rooted criminal identity he got. that's not the way violence unfolds. >> i want to interject something as well because i want to quote ircan ford in new york. when she works with young team who have become perpetrators it's from the standpoint that they were initially victims and there was no process between them being victims to becoming perpetrators. that the state intervened in. so in other words, it's the point you made. this motion that the unsolved murders is where you have to deal with the culture of violence. if you're only talking about -- you're never tackling the culture in which violence rages. i know from experience. i know from you living in a space in a home where there's soldiers and guns.

what it does to your humanity and your psyche is just dangerous and at 12 you're not equipped to make your family safe. but that's what you feel. and you're asking children to adopt policy and actions that an adult is responsible for and while you have the interrupters and different interventions that work we're talking about and what we need is a policy that respects the humanity of these children as mrg's children and doesn't create this kind of apartheid of neighborhood and geographical apartheid and then criminalizes those who adopt violence. >> i think the political problems for recall emmanuel are a good sign. i wreb when i lived in chicago murders were much higher and frankly, no one cared and by "no one" i mean the small group of white elites that ran the city of chicago because it wasn't happening then and it wasn't happening in those neighborhoods. >> because you go into the -- you criminalize is mothers that are grieving because of what

they might do because they lost their kids. no one will suggest that. >> caring is important. the courage that we've been talking about, folks actually going out there and getting between two men, one that may have a gun is critical. but we actually have to have the courage as a society to make that enough. >> that's right. >> because right now, that's not enough. >> right. >> because we drench that area with guns, right? that's not enough because that area doesn't have jobs. you can train for all the jobs you want but if there's no jobs you can't find a job. so we actually have -- and because, quite frankly, too few of our chiefs have the courage to tell their cops, get out of your car. walk that neighborhood. know that neighborhood. in san francisco, we had two very dangerous places. and one of them we brought crime down very fast because the cops got out of their cars. >> what you should know for the news week ahead coming up next.

...and down. just use your maxperks card and get a case of x-9 paper for only 1-cent after maxperks rewards. find thousands of big deals now... ...at officemax. five days later, i had a massive heart attack. bayer aspirin was the first thing the emts gave me. now, i'm on a bayer aspirin regimen. [ male announcer ] be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. [ woman ] learn from my story. if we took the already great sentra apart and completely reimagined it? ...with best-in-class combined mpg... and more interior room than corolla and civic? ...and a technology suite with bluetooth, navigation and other handy stuff? yeah, that would be cool. introducing the all-new nissan sentra. it's our most innovative sentra ever. nissan. innovation that excites. now get a $169-per-month lease on a 2013 nissan sentra. ♪ ♪

doing it with a cold, just not going to happen. vicks dayquil -- powerful non-drowsy 6-symptom cold & flu relief. ♪ no matter what city you're playing tomorrow. [ coughs ] [ male announcer ] you can't let a cold keep you up tonight. ♪ vicks nyquil -- powerful nighttime 6-symptom cold & flu relief. ♪

♪ so, what should you know for the week coming up? thanks to the most comprehensive study of their time, you should know that being officially overweight is correlated with higher life expectancy than being normal weight. we know the body mass index over 30 had a higher risk of death but those with bmis of 25 to 30 had a lower risk of death than those of one between 18.25 and 25. there's a lot we don't know about the relationship between weight and health. the metric used to determine whether someone is the appropriate weight body mass index declares a lot of adults as obese. we know it may be time to

question whether that metric itself is a useful one for facilitating a healthy weight. transocean and the spill in 2010 is pleading guilty to violating the clean water act. you should know we are still drilling in deep water in the gulf and the arctic and extracting oil in north dakota. each new technology of fossil fuel brings with it risks of continued carbon emissions. the fbi ran an all-time record number of backgrounds checks for gun purchases in december suggesting many rush to buy guns in the wake of the newtown massacre. there are no statistics for the purchases, the majority of them require a background check. they serve as a rough approximaty of sales.

2.8 million background checks up from 2 million in november and up 49% of december 2011, which itself, was a record high at the time. you should also know while gun sales have been spiking up and setting records, the percentage of american households with guns has been declining. we are increasingly headed toward an america where a smaller and smaller number of people have a larger amount of guns. i want to find out what the guests think we should know. >> that bmi news wasn't good for me. evidence based introductions -- >> that's bragging. that's bragging. that's a humble brag right there. all right, continue. how do we feel, huh? >> you should know that evidence based interventions can reduce

crime an analysis of ban sports edition reduced crime and helped young people stay in school. >> okay. >> you should know if you see a crime, if you see a beef happening in your community as men in the community, get in the middle of it. step in. talk to the young brothers. talk to the young sisters. tell them this is not the way. offer them sense, hope, offer them something where they can feel comfortable to open up to us adults. a lot of time the youth don't like to open up to us. standing in the middle can oftentimes be a good thing. >> we should know not only do we have a do nothing congress the last two years, we will have one the next two years if reid doesn't change the filibuster. >> there's claims on the table that looked promising, then it

looked like it was being gutted from the inside out. we are going talk about that. d-day, whether it's going to happen or not. when pressure arose over it, mitch mcconnell changed. pressure works. >> it's usually important. we think the filibuster is mr. smith. put on your depends and stand there. that's not what it is. that's what we want it to be. you know? if you are going to block democracy, we need to see your face. >> know whether you are on the west side of chicago, south side of chicago or sandytown, you are america's children and entitled to emotional justice. you should not have to be shaped by the legacy of untreated trauma and violence that we sanction and accept. in one week's time, the tsa, temporary shelter assistance runs out. the fact they have not passed

the formal legislation means you are leaving millions of people who have been made homeless homeless again. we are having that discussion tomorrow morning. >> i want to thank harold from the university of chicago, keith, ben and aster. thank you all. thank you for joining us. we'll be back next week saturday and sunday at 8:00 eastern time. coming up next is melissa harris perry. the politics on the weight loss industry. plus, kevin drum will be there as well. all that on "mhp". see you next week here on "up." ♪ [ male announcer ] how do you turn an entrepreneur's dream... ♪ into a scooter that talks to the cloud? ♪ or turn 30-million artifacts... ♪

into a high-tech masterpiece? ♪ whatever your business challenge, dell has the technology and services to help you solve it.

woman: we're helping joplin, missouri, come back from a devastating tornado. man: and now we're helping the east coast recover from hurricane sandy. we're a leading global insurance company, based right here in america. we've repaid every dollar america lent us. everything, plus a profit of more than $22 billion. for the american people. thank you, america. helping people recover and rebuild -- that's what we do. now let's bring on tomorrow. this morning, my question. who is profiting from your new year's resolution to lose weight? plus, the one element that could be causing everything from high prime rates to lower iqs.

the war on poverty, then and now. first, are the democrats ready to get this party started? good morning, i'm melissa harris perry. president obama will move forward with one eye on the political moment of the day and the other on the political legacy of a lifetime. when the time comes to hand over the keys to the white house to the successor, so too, will the president hand over his role as the head of the democratic party. jefferson, lincoln, roosevelt and reagan left behind empowered coalition without the charismatic leader who helped forge the original alliances. president obama's obligation is to ensure a democratic party strong enough to stand on its

own after he's no longer there to support it. quite frankly, without the president to lean on, the democrats are looking wobbly at the moment. right now, the democratic party is basking in a residual warm and fuzzy left over in the wake of the president's re-election. in november, 51% of rerespond t rerespondents gave the democratic party a favorable rating compared to 40% of the gop. it's only temporary. before the election, you have to go back to the summer of 2009 to find a time when americans weren't just as disgusted with democrats as they are republicans. the president has his work cut out for him. there are certain pred assessors to turn to for guidance but there's one american icon president obama needs, martha stewart. no one knows more about party planning than ma that.